Chris

Paula wrote: “I suppose I should spell out the circularity of your argument.

You say 1 Tim. 2 is about authority of all men over all women for all time because Paul refers to creation order.
You say creation order must therefore be about authority because Paul refers to it in 1 Tim. 2.

That’s a tautology.”

I’m not sure what you are getting at because if evaluate modus ponens with truth table, you will see that it is a tautology since all the values under the main connective are true.

Maybe you meant to say I’m question begging (a type of circular reasoning), if I read you right. But I am not. If Paul’s argument implies that the proscription (vs. 12) is in the OT, then his proscription really *is* in the OT. Patriarchalists accept the antecedent on Paul’s apostolic authority.

At any rate, you’ve horribly misrepresented my view. I’ve already said your reading comprehension is bad, and this helps to confirm it. I never said anything like “1 Tim. 2 is about authority of all men over all women for all time because Paul refers to creation order.”